It has been over one month since the latest dangerous piece of legislation meant to infringe on Americans’ constitutional rights was introduced, and Congress is now moving forward with the bill that will have serious ramifications for all Americans by blatantly violating the freedoms guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment if it becomes law.
The USA Liberty Act has passed the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 27-8, and as Congressman Justin Amash noted, all privacy advocates should be concerned about the overwhelming support the bill is receiving from Congress.
“The Liberty Act passed committee 27-8. It allows the government to search our private data without a warrant—in violation of the 4th Amendment,” Amash wrote on Twitter. “It’s another bill, like the Freedom Act, that furthers violations of our rights under the guise of protecting our rights.”
The #LibertyAct passed committee 27-8. It allows the government to search our private data without a warrant—in violation of the #4thAmendment. It’s another bill, like the #FreedomAct, that furthers violations of our rights under the guise of protecting our rights.
— Justin Amash (@justinamash) November 8, 2017
As Amash implied, the USA Liberty Act provides the opposite of “Liberty” for Americans. Instead, the purpose of the bill is to reauthorize and create additional loopholes for Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which is set to expire on Dec. 31, 2017.
Amash also noted that the USA Liberty Act is yet another piece of legislation that “furthers violations of our rights under the guise of protecting our rights.” He compared it to the USA Freedom Act, which was passed under similar circumstances in June 2015.
The House Judiciary has also tried to use the USA Freedom Act as a reference to its success, claiming that the bill “ended the bulk collection of data, protected civil liberties and national security, and provided robust oversight and transparency of our vital national security tools.”
However, as The Free Thought Project reported in May 2015, the USA Freedom Act “doesn’t actually end or suspend the phone records program, but simply requires phone companies to hold onto these records rather than the NSA.” It also authorized, for the first time, “the NSA, FBI, and other government agencies to unconstitutionally collect data in bulk on potentially millions of law-abiding Americans,” and it let the NSA collect “cell phone records in addition to the landline call records.”
Now, as Congress prepares to pass the USA Liberty Act, it claims the bill will “better protect Americans’ privacy” by requiring the government to have “a legitimate national security purpose” before searching an individual’s database. But what the bill does not advertise is the fact that it does not actually address the legitimate problems that exist with Section 702. The FBI’s “legitimate national security purpose” could be justified by just about any reason the agency chooses to give, and agents will only need supervisory authority in order to search Americans’ metadata.
Weeks before the latest vote, more than 40 organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Freedom of the Press Foundation, joined together in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee, condemning the USA Liberty Act.
The coalition noted that the bill fails to address concerns with the “backdoor search loophole,” which allows the government to “conduct warrantless searches for the information of individuals who are not targets of Section 702, including U.S. citizens and residents.”
The USA Liberty Act departs from the recommendation made by the President’s Review Group on Surveillance, appropriations amendments that have previously passed the House, and urgings of civil society organizations, which would have required a probable cause warrant prior to searching the Section 702 database for information about a U.S. citizen or resident absent narrow exceptions. As written, it raises several concerns. First, the bill’s most glaring deficiency is that it does not require a warrant to access content in cases where the primary purpose is to return foreign intelligence. This is an exception that threatens to swallow the rule.
A legislative analysis from the Electronic Freedom Foundation noted that the USA Liberty Act does not “institute adequate transparency and oversight measures,” it does not “deal with misuse of the state secrets privilege, which has been invoked to stave off lawsuits against mass surveillance,” and most importantly, it will not “curtail the NSA’s practices of collecting data on innocent people.”
The science surrounding the USA Liberty Act is nothing new—from the time the USA Patriot Act was passed on fear-based propaganda in 2001, the United States government has used trendy names such as “Freedom” and “Liberty” as an appeal, while working with the mainstream media to politicize any and every tragic attack, in order to convince the American public that they must give up their liberties, in order to ensure temporary security.
Rachel Blevins is a Texas-based journalist who aspires to break the left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. Follow Rachel on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. This article first appeared at The Free Thought Project.
The Fed Committee doesn’t pass Acts, it advises on Bills. Not only that but they appear to have ordered some amendment to it. Is there a fishy odour around here or is that just me
The US CONSTITUTION is the supreme LAW of this land. It is also the SUPREME CONTRACT that ALL who serve within our governments are under, add to that, also Oath bound to. Breaking the Oath is a crime – felony, Perjury, etc. Going against the US Constitution is also a felony, a crime. Now add to that when one breaks a written contract that they serve under what happens? They NO LONGER MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE POSITION OCCUPIED.
The First (1) Amendment has in writing exactly who can create legislation that is LAWFULLY binding on the American people – not to say there are some dumbed down Oath takers in enforcement that go against this by enforcing color of law, pretend law against the American people. Of course that is a felony, Perjury, *terrorism, etc on their part; add to that treason if done knowingly. All are responsible for their actions while serving.
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 1: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of
the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
It even says in writing exactly who has can use the delegated Authority to create binding legislation – thsoe that serve wtihin the House of Reps, and those that serve within the Senate. No one else.
Since the US Constitution also requires that ALL legislation must be “in Pursuance thereof” the US Constitution (follow it), and also requires that the people’s speech must NOT be abridged by those that serve within our government, it would be a crime on the part of ALL involved increating this legislation in any way because all take an Oath that requires them to support and defend the US Constitution, not any person, office, branch, entity, agency, group, etc. That is the LAWFUL requirment of all governmental positions that all accept to do when taking the position they occupy. It might even be treasonous.
Treason – Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States provides: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
There are three elements that are necessary for an offense to constitute treason:
— an obligation of allegiance to the legal order,
— intent to go against that legal order, and then
— the action that violates that obligation legal order.
Working against the US Constitution contains all three elements.
Ramsey Clark: “A right is not what someone gives you; it’s what no one can take from you.”
James Madison: “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.”
Brookfield Construction Company V. Stewart 284 F Sup. 94: “An officer who acts in violation of the constitution ceases to represent the government.”
Alexander Hamilton: “Every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
Archibald Maclaine said during North Carolina’s ratifying convention: “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority
to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’”
Gov. Samuel Johnston, North Carolina Ratifying Convention of the U.S. Constitution (1788): “When Congress makes a law in virtue of their constitutional authority, it will be an actual law. I do not know a more expressive or a better way of representing the idea by words. Every law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.”
*28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
Color of law: The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under “color of law.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241.
Great post, chock full of good information about the Constitution, however, you cannot use the US Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it. “No private person has a right to complain by suit in court on the ground of a breach of the United States constitution; for, though the constitution is a compact, he is not a party to it.” Padelford Fay & Co v. The Mayor and Alderman of the City of Savannah 14, Georgia 438, 520.
The Constitution is a compact, or a treaty between two nations, not between a nation and its people. It is between the US and Great Britain, from whom we never gained independence. See: Treaty of Paris where King George III of France (and the Holy Roman Empire) financed both sides of our Revolutionary War.
America is a British colony. The “United States” is a corporation, not a land mass and it existed before the Revolutionary War and the British troops did not leave until 1796. Respublica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43, Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat. 80, IRS Publication 6209, Articles of Association, October 20, 1774.
And you’ll never find a judge that will uphold it for you because there are no Judicial courts in America and have not been since 1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce them. FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428, 1 Stat. 138-178. And, there have not been any judges in America since 1789. There have just been administrators. FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1 Stat. 138-178.
Nor will the police protect your Constitutional “rights” (governments and treaties don’t afford nor protect rights like Cal wrote). It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the corporation and arrest code breakers. Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, Reiff v. City of Phila. 477 F. Supp 1262, Lynch v. NC Dept. of Justice, 376 SE 2nd 247.
And finally, “The People” does not include you and me. Barron v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore 32 US 243.
So the Constitution does nothing for us, and everything for those who profess to own us as slaves (see: Capitis Diminutio Maxima (meaning a maximum loss of status) – The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. This is denoted when you use your name in all capital letters. We are slaves, and slaves have NO rights, only privileges for which we must first contract, then pay.
And slaves can own no property. Why? Because they ARE property. You own no property. Slaves can’t own property. Read carefully the deed to the property you think is yours. You are listed as a tenant. Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st session.
“Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an “individual entity.” Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 LEd. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773. March 10, 1936.
We are traded as human capital (Executive Order 13037), and mandated to have a social security number (issued by the UN). According to GATT you must have a Social Security Number. House Report (103-826). General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was a multilateral agreement regulating international trade. According to its preamble, its purpose was the “substantial reduction of tariffs and other trade barriers and the elimination of preferences, on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis.”
Social Security Numbers are issued by the UN through the IMF. The application for a Social Security number is the SS5 form. The Department of the Treasury (IMF) issues the SS5 not the Social Security Administration. The new SS5 forms do not state who publishes them while the old form states they are Department of the Treasury. 20 CFR Chap. 111 Subpart B 422.103 (b).
We have no US Treasury Department anymore. The IRS is not a U.S. government agency. It is an agency of the IMF. Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I, Public Law 94-564, Senate report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.
The IMF is an agency of the U.N. Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Ed. p. 816.
The United States has NOT had a Treasury since 1921. 41 Stat. Ch. 214 p. 654.
The U.S. Treasury is now the IMF. Presidential Documents Volume 29 – No. 4 p. 113, 22 U.S.C. 285-288.
Read the Declaration of Independence which says that the American colonies of Great Britain had become “free and independent states” – separate states. The U.S. Constitution refers constantly to the states, but never to a “nation” (Read the US Constitution and see for yourself).
The 1783 Treaty of Paris, which ended our war with Great Britain, held that each state was a sovereign nation. As such, each feared giving up its rights to a powerful central government. Anti-federalists wanted some sort of guarantee that states would remain sovereign and that the power of the federal government would be limited and it would be recognized as a creation of, an agent of and a servant of the states. They said their votes to ratify could only be obtained if the Constitution contained a bill of rights protecting the rights of the people and their states.
Treaty of Paris – signed by both U.S. and British Representatives on September 3, 1783, ending the American Revolutionalry War. The terms of the U.S.-Britain treaty was that Britain recognized the independence of the United States with generous boundaries extending to the Mississippi River but Britain kept Canada.
You keep referring to pretend “laws”, color of law, fake laws. Each state and its government was created by the people. The PEOPLE’S state representatives created the federal government to be a representative for the states in dealing with (mostly) foreign affairs. Read up on contract law. The compact is a contract between the states who created it. The contract (US Constitution, each state’s Constitution) is for those who are employed – elected, hired, contracted, etc – to further the lawful/legal ties to those that serve within our government they are LAWFULLY required to take and KEEP an Oath. Do NOT listen to those who are in law, even constitutional law, they do NOT even read the US Constitution, they are taught precedent – a judges opinion over the last 30 – 40 years. Very unlawful.
Mark Twain: “For in a Republic, who is “the country?” Is it the Government which is for the moment in the saddle? Why, the Government is merely a servant – merely a temporary
servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn’t. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.”
“The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” The Supreme Court of the United States, 186
James Wilson: “I leave it to every gentleman to say whether the enumerated powers are not as ACCURATELY and MINUTELY DEFINED, as can be well done on the same subject, in the same language…nor does it, in any degree, go beyond the particular enumeration; for, when it is said that Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper, those words are LIMITED AND DEFINED by the following, “for carrying into execution the foregoing powers”, it is saying no more than that the powers we have already particularly given (enumerated), shall be effectually carried into execution.” (caps are mine)
Gov. Samuel Johnston, North Carolina Ratifying Convention of the U.S. Constitution 1788: “When Congress makes a law in virtue of their constitutional authority, it will be an actual law. I do not know a more expressive or a better way of representing the idea by words. Every law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.”
Archibald Maclaine said (North Carolina’s ratifying convention): “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You
cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’”
“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356
“What is a constitution? It is the form of government, delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established.” Van Horne v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304.
“A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority.” Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.
“The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres.” Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.
“The constitution of a state is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon the temper of the times, not to rise and fall with the tide of events. Notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immoveable, as a mountain amidst the strife and storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves.” Vanhorne v. Dorrance, supra.
“We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted.” Mattox v. United States, 156 U. S. 237, 243.
Basically you are saying that whatever a traitor or domestic enemy does (that serves within our government) immediately becomes law and binding on the American people. That is not so.
Willi Münzenberg, propagandist for the Communist Party of Germany, about the move of the Frankfurt School to the Columbia University in the United States about 1933: “We will make America stink. Only then, after we have corrupted all its values and made life base, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.”
Long quote, but important. The full text can be found at
“https://thementalmilitia.net/2015/12/05/the-clue-in-the-two-letter-word/
Looking at the last phrase in that Amendment we note that it says “…OR TO THE PEOPLE.” It could have been worded: “…and to the people” instead of being worded: “…or to the people”. Some people in America today think that it should have been “and”. I generally refer to such people as “statists”. We will look at their view of that Amendment, below, but first let us look at the Constitutionalist’s view.
While not being very apparent, the choice of the word “or” as the proper word for that place in the wording of the Amendment is hugely indicative of the ultimate source of sovereignty. On this earth, the truest source of sovereignty would be, of course, “We The People”. The individual is the source of all sovereignty, and he was granted that sovereignty by Nature or by Nature’s God. The Constitution is built around that fact, and supports that fact. In truth, as we learn by studying the writings of Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., the Constitution in its entirety is designed specifically to protect that fact in the
application of governance as willed and written by the People.
The hierarchy of sovereignty in our American experience would list in proper order:
1. The individual self; and,
2. The State in which that self lives and to which that self extends a portion of its original sovereignty; and,
3. The Union of the several States with its delegated and granted powers, duties and disabilities, which function, as we commonly term the infrastructure, as the “Three Branches” of federal government. (Yes, the 3 branches of our government are NOT the 3 branches of the federal or state governments, but first are the people, second the states, third, is the last government created, the federal.)
The individual is properly placed above the respective State governments, and the State governments are properly placed above certain spheres of the General government in WDC.
There are, as Justice Scalia noted in the majority opinion on Mack/Printz v USA (1997), areas within the States into which the General government may not properly intrude or incur, and there are areas in the General government into which the States may not intrude or incur. … portion of Scalia’s statement:
“It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of “dual sovereignty”…. Although the States surrendered many of their powers to the new Federal Government, they retained “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty”…. Residual state sovereignty was also implicit, of course, in the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discrete, enumerated ones. Article 1, Section 8, which implication was rendered express by the Tenth Amendment’s assertion that “[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”. The Framers’ experience under the Articles of Confederation had persuaded them that using the States as the instruments of federal governance was both ineffectual and provocative of federal state conflict. The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the state and federal governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The great innovation of this design was that our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it.”… The Constitution thus contemplates that a State’s government will represent and remain accountable to its own citizens. As Madison expressed it: “[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” ….This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty.””
Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 33: “…If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose
creature it is, must appeal to the standard [The Constitution] they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify….”
Those that serve within the position of the US President, within the Senate, and within the
judicial get the Authority they are allowed use to act from the branch and/or named office within the US Constitution. The objects of their lawful powers are losted in the US Constitution. This means that the President and Senate both must be authorized in the Constitution to act on an object before any Treaty made by them on that object qualifies as part of “the supreme Law of the Land”. If the Constitution does not authorize the President and Congress to act on an object, the Treaty is not “Law” – it then becomes a
usurpation, and deserves to be treated as such. (Federalist Paper No. 33, last para).
Because the Constitution is “fundamental” law (Federalist 78, 11th & 12th paragraphs), it is The Standard by which the legitimacy of all Presidential Acts, all Acts of Congress, all Treaties, and all Judicial Decisions is measured (Federalist 78).
That’s a hard pill to swallow and doesn’t appear to be red or blue. So who IS my massa? It sounds like anyone who wants to live WILL “take The Mark” when instructed.
It probably isn’t different for the Proles in any other country in the world, today.
Rockafeller’s IMF has been in existence for some time and there have been plenty of articles positing a cashless society, some, recently. Will the slaves of this world rise up against their masters?
I still have a forty year old paperback by Larry Abraham entitled CALL IT CONSPIRACY, right under our noses.
Excellent question! One needs only learn who one cannot criticize to find who his massa is, and one cannot criticize nor question the law. So whose law is it? Our country, as shown by the gold fringe around the flag denoting a military venue under martial law rule, operates under Roman Canon (ecclesiastical) Civil Law aka Admiralty aka Maritime aka UCC Universal Commercial Code aka “color of law” (having the appearance of law but with no real authority without contract). So our system of law is Roman, and all roads really do lead there.
We speak English which is derived from Latin or Roman, and Great Britain, our owners, were conquered by Rome in 1213, so by proxy, your massa is the Pope (hiding behind the UN). And according to Roman Canon Law, the words “Universal” and “Roman Catholic” are interchangeable. We use the Roman Calendar, too. Can’t criticize a calendar or a language, you’d be locked up as an incompetent imbecile (a legal term).
The Pope can abolish any law in the United States. Elements of Ecclesiastical Law, Vol. 1, 53-54.
A 1040 Form is for Tribute paid to Britain. IRS Publication 6209.
The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. Papal Bulls of 1495 & 1493. [most Papal Bulls are written on human skin]
The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of millions of people. Papal Bulls of 1455 & 1493.
The Pope’s laws are obligatory on everyone. Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioces, lib, ix, c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844, Syllabus prop 28, 29, 44.
Treaty of Paris 1783 (note the date, 7 years after we supposedly gained independence from Britain), which states George III is not only King of Britain, but also Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire AND of the USA: “It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the Most Serene and Most Potent Prince, George the Third, by the grace of God, King of the Great Britain, France and Ireland, Defender, of the Faith , Duke of Brunswick and Laurenberg, Arch-Treasurer and PRINCE ELECTOR OF THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, & C. AND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, . . ..”
Proof we are now under martial law rule with gold fringe around our flags: “As we have said, the Federal Personal Income Tax is collected under a military venue within a martial law jurisdiction. Federal Reserve Notes are Military Scrip circulated within a military venue. Under the Social Security Act [1933], there was brought into existence Ten Federal Regional Areas [sounds a lot like FEMA regions, yes? but they’ve been here over 70 years]. These Ten Federal Regional Areas are the same as a military base…” Dyett v. Turner 439 P2d 266 @ 269, 20 U2d 403 [1968] Judge A.H. Ellett, Utah Supreme Court.
Thanks. I have read everything that you have included, before. Sadly, few others have and our government is in queue to have their oppression turned upon them. Trump is on the right path and needs our thoughts and prayers. I my be too much of an optimist but, I Believe he can drain the Swamp. It may take years.
Didn’t know that many others knew this.
the ‘supreme LAW’ was written AFTER all the NATIVE INDIAN KILLINGS… Just wonder, how much of it all, is a curtain to ‘assure false freedom’, in a way the law actually ‘works’. How important is in all these ‘laws’, a process of ERASING THE PAST EVENTS, and filling them with enslaving junk? If the ‘law’ would really ‘work’, we would have been in a PARADISE, right now. But Unfortunately, most of us all are currently in a lawfull HELL, nicely orchestrated by every single past and new ‘law’, written by the ‘educated’ ones…
” If the ‘law’ would really ‘work’, we would have been in a PARADISE, right now. But Unfortunately, most of us all are currently in a lawfull HELL, nicely orchestrated by every single past and new ‘law’, written bythe ‘educated’ ones…”
How can the “law” work when its enforcers do not know their duty anymore? Who does the US Constitution assign to (and by that designation, forbid any other agency, person, etc to do so)
— Enforce the US Constitution(highest LAW of this nation and contract for ALL who serve within our governments) and each state’s Constitution (highest LAW of the state and 2nd highest contract for those whoserve within state governments) except in the rare instances of conflict with the US Constitution),
— Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional laws ONLY),
— Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
— “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”?
That would be the Militia of the several states, the American people. US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 15. If you also read Clause 16 you will find the duties that those who serve within the federal and state governments have TO THE MILITIAS.
Then knkow that what you are describing is color of law, pretend law BECAUSE there can be NO LAWFUL legislation that is not in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution, nor any real government. What you are describing are the “domestic enemies” described in all Oaths, and traitors. One can be a traitor unknowingly by NOT reading the document that they are Oathbound to, required to know and follow in order for their actions to be lawful because in order to be Lawful they are REQUIRED know what the terms to “support and defend” the US Constitution means, and what that very short document requires of those that serve within our governments – not a person, office, agency, group, etc. By the way, it is also REQUIRED of us to know it, and know our own state Constitution so that we know when those that serve within our governments are going offtrack, so that we can remove them.
Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides… The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights… The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights.
The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public
officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
… the famous case Norton v. Shelby County… The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” (Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School). His emphasis is on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed cases.) (end quote)
We are at fault as we have not bothered in decades to do our duty, to even bother to know how to be an informed juror – a very important protection of our rights and control of those who serve within our governments. Are you aware that not only the Militia – trained as the Congress requires the military to train is what is supposed to hod those that serve within our government accountable? Or that we can use our other tool, the Grand Jury Investigations? Or our other tool, the Grand Jury?
Grand Jury – “The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but NOT in the body of the Constitution. It has NOT been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”.
“Thus, CITIZENS HAVE THE UNBRIDLED RIGHT TO EMPANEL THEIR OWN GRAND JURIES and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” (Misbehavior, “Good Behaviour” requirement)
“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.”
“Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand
jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal
wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”
“The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. The grand jury REQUIRES NO AUTHORIZATION FROM ITS CONSTITUTING COURT TO INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.”
“Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge”
“Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” (Nor would it be lawful of them to do so.) Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992) (end quote)
WE know longer bother to know what is allowed for those who serve within our governments to do. We no longer even know our own duties within our nation, did you think that freedom does not require actions from those who wish to be truly free? What is freedom?
Frank Chodorov: “Freedom is essentially a condition of inequality, not equality. It recognizes as a fact of nature the structural differences inherent in man – in temperament, character, and capacity – and it respects those differences. We are not alike and no law can make us so.”
But it also means we are free from regulation, from most types of todays “taxes”, from yearly payments to government to be able to keep our property we bought and paid for, we can travel anywhere without registration/permits, etc.
Patrick Henry, Virginia Convention, 1788: “You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased, nor how you are to become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured; for liberty ought to be the direct end of your government.” (as quoted by Thomas M. Moneure, Jr., in “Virginia’s Great Dissenters”, printed in the March, 1999, issue of American Guardian, pp 38-40)
Consider what the domestic enemies who serve within our governments are doing today. WE ahve TSA everywhere, spying on us, stopping us, searching us all without a LAWFUL CAUSE OR WARRANT. Those are all actions of *terrorism against the American people. How stupid can people get to submit? I am NOT advocating anything but to NOT FLY. Excuses are used by many for why THEY have to fly, but when will they support their country and freedom? THERE IS NO EXCUSE. Etc.
Daniel Webster: “We may be tossed upon an ocean where we can see no land – nor, perhaps, the sun or stars. But there is a chart and a compass for us to study, to consult, and to obey. That chart is the Constitution.”
Daniel Webster: “Is the Constitution worth preserving?” He said, “Then guard it as you
would the very seat of your life. Guard it not only against the open blows of violence but also against that spirit of change.”
*28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
Justice William O. Douglas, dissenting, Colten v. Kentucky, 407 U.S. 104 (1972): “Since
when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents. We who have the final word can speak softly or angrily. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.”
Jesus, Matthew 20:25: “…the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant.” < This is one of the reasons that
in America the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution basically are the governments, while it is the people who SERVE within those governments that carry out the duties put into writing within the Constitutions.
Mark Twain: “For in a Republic, who is "the country?" Is it the Government which is for the moment in the saddle? Why, the Government is merely a servant – merely a temporary
servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.”
/sigh
Well said, Cat; please forward this on to The Rutherford Institute, and the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, and perhaps the law office of Jay Sekulow.
all of you are wasting your breath. they’re just putting a little icing on what they have been doing all along. (Actually, they’ve been doing a lot more than what this article states. So this discussion is ludicrous)
WHO does the US Constitution assign to
— Enforce the US Constitution (supreme Law of this nation) and each state’s Constitution (highest Law of the state),
— Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional legislation ONLY),
— Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
— “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.
That would be the Militia of the several states, us – trained as the Congress requires the military to train, knowledgeable of the US Constitution and our own state’s Constitution. If we are NOT doing our duty, what do you expect of those who want power, prestige, money who serve within our governments? Our type of government requires the people themselves to be knowledgable and to do their duties.
Part of the problem is, we have been accepting unconstitutional bulls**t on all levels for decades by slow encroachment. Why don’t we fight local level “laws” and “doctrines” that vitiate every day people’s rights 365 days of every year? For example, “The Doctrine of Judicial Immunity” which allows Judges to commit crimes against citizens with impunity so long as they call it part of being a Judge? Or punish them for how they have rigged the courts so that the Constitution is the absolute last thing they consider? Or the use of civil court to sidestep our rights and do sometimes worse things to us than a criminal court- ever been in so called “family” or “child protection” courts? They have statutes blatantly written that say “normal rules of evidence do not apply,” with no other law to say what does. THAT is ludicrous, and yet we allow it to continue because if Judges could not pick your pockets for all your wealth we’d have more normal theft? Really. The little things allow the big things. Until people stop throwing themselves into learned helplessness this will only get worse.
The ONLY immunity that those who serve within our governments have is listed within the US Constitution, and there is NO other LAWFUL immunitities, only usuarpations and actions taken against the American people – and that only happens because the people allowed themselves to be”dumbed down”.
READ this and begin to understand why this is so.
Bertrand Russell,1953: “… Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible…” (“The Impact of Science on Society”, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1953)
…oh…but we are all just….”Conspiracy Theorists”….right?
RJ O’Guillory
It’s so much easier to just go back to sleep…watch celebrity gossip and eat potato chips…unless your God might require a little more from you??
Or the Founding Fathers? Or all the veterans who fought and died, so that you could have the freedom that you have been enjoying until now??
I am a retired Federally Protected Whistle Blower…for US DoD who beat the corrupt government at their own game. What we needed are ethical, honest people….who will inspire our society to learn about…and actually strive to live up to Constitutional ideals.
Sounds good to me.
The federal government has made it’s war on the public an almost insurmountable force. We are surrounded, surveilled and targeted by the world’s most sophisticated weapons, 24/7.
Of course the media is silent, as it’s owned by he Military Industrial Complex (MIC)
The govt passes a lot of fake laws. No “law” that contradicts the US Constitution is actually law. Yes, they have to physical power to lock you up, but that doesn’t make it legitimate law.
Thank God! Exactly! Thank you for bothering to be informed!
Give them an inch, and they will take a mile!!! We MUST stop this before it gets started!!
Most of the world knows how full of bs they are, these cloak and dagger, secret society trash. They can no longer hide their fascist machinations with smoke and mirrors. That’s the reason for the ramping up of False Flags – they know their time’s coming and they’re desperate to maintain control. The criminals are fighting a losing battle. Good riddance!
talk…talk…talk…talk…. its not getting us anywhere…. it’s time for a new approach ….